We carried out a review of the data available to us about Woodcote on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Woodcote, you can give feedback on this service.
Woodcote is a residential care service for six younger adults and older people who need support due to having learning adaptive needs/autism.
At the time of this inspection there were six people living in the service. All the people had complex needs for support. Two people used individual forms of sign-assisted language to express themselves.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who live in the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning adaptive needs/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence.
For more details, please read the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
People's experience of using the service:
People and their relatives were positive about the service. A person said, “I like it here.” Another person said, “Good, good” when we asked them about their home. A relative said, "I’m happy knowing my family member lives in Woodcote because I know that they have what they need and will have it after I’m gone.”
People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse.
People received safe care, treatment and support in line with national guidance from support staff who had the knowledge and skills they needed.
There were enough support staff on duty and safe recruitment practices were in place.
People were supported to use medicines safely.
Lessons had been learnt when things had gone wrong.
People had been helped to receive medical attention when necessary.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Most of the accommodation was well maintained and there were plans to address one shortfall.
Support staff were courteous and polite.
People’s privacy was respected and confidential information was handled in the right way.
People received person-centred care and they were supported to pursue their hobbies and interests.
There were robust arrangements to manage complaints.
There were arrangements to treat people with compassion at the end of their lives to enable them to have a pain-free death.
People had been consulted about the development of the service.
Good team work was promoted and regulatory requirements had been met.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. At the previous inspection on 16/17 April 2018 there was a breach of regulations. This was because the registered persons had not established sufficiently robust arrangements to monitor and evaluate the operation of the service. At this inspection in June 2019 suitable provision had been made to ensure the smooth running of the service and the breach of regulations had been resolved.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit in line with our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
Woodcote provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people who have learning disabilities and some associated physical and/or sensory disabilities. There were six people using the service at the time of inspection. The building was situated over two floors, with people’s bedrooms located on the second floor. Some people had their own bathrooms attached to their bedrooms and there were communal facilities for those that did not. There was a kitchen, dining-room, large lounge and sensory room for people to relax in. People also had access to a large patio area and three acres of land at the back of the property. This included a paddock, tennis courts and a lake.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We observed staff offering people choices and they had a good understanding of how to support those who lacked capacity to make decisions. However, documentation that recorded people’s understanding of specific decisions did not reflect the person’s views or those that knew them well. We have made a recommendation regarding this.
Regular quality audits were completed by the registered manager, deputy manager, service manager and director. However, a number of shortfalls were found within record keeping which demonstrated current auditing processes needed to be developed. Staff had a thorough knowledge of people and their support needs, which meant where shortfalls were identified, there was limited impact to people. Documentation that was missing, incomplete or due for review, was not always identified for example, people’s evacuation plans lacked person centred information in how to support them during an emergency. There were also inconsistencies within staff documentation, particularly with regard to training. Staff and relatives told us they completed surveys regularly to express their views on the service, however there was a lack of evidence to demonstrate information being analysed and feedback given.
People were safe. Staff understood how to protect people against harm and there were suitable levels of staff available to ensure people’s needs could be met at any time. Staff were recruited safely and appropriate background checks were made to ensure their character and skills were suitable to support people. There were individualised risk assessments for people and the environment and building they lived in. This included guidance for supporting people with behaviours that challenged. Incidents were investigated within relevant timescales and appropriate actions taken to ensure they did not happen again. Medicines were managed safely. People were supported by staff that were trained in administering medicines.
Staff told us they received a wide range of training to ensure they could support people safely. They spoke highly of their induction into the home that included shadowing experienced staff and developing a thorough knowledge of people and their routines. Staff also benefited from taking part in regular supervision and appraisal to help them develop their skills and knowledge. Staff felt supported and encouraged in their personal development and relatives were confident that staff had the skills and knowledge to support people. Staff attended regular team meetings where they could discuss any concerns.
People were supported to access a wide of range of professionals to ensure that their health and social well-being was promoted. All professionals we spoke to felt that the provider was genuinely concerned and responsive to people at all times.
Relatives and professionals felt that people were supported by a kind, caring staff team. People had built good relationships with staff and their dignity, independence and privacy was promoted and encouraged. Staff knew people, their preferences and support needs well. People had their own key-worker; this was a named member of staff who had a central role in their lives and would oversee their support needs and care plans.
People had choice and control over the activities they wanted to participate in each day. These were tailor-made to people’s likes and dislikes. Staff and the relatives were knowledgeable of the complaints procedure and confident they could talk to the registered manager about anything that was worrying them.
Although there were areas for improvement in records, people, staff, relatives and professionals spoke highly of the management team. They felt that the service was well-led and that an open, transparent and supportive culture was promoted.
We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.
This inspection took place on 18 June 2015 and was unannounced.
Woodcote is a privately owned residential care home providing care and en-suite accommodation for up to six people with a learning disability. They specialise in autism, challenging behaviour, epilepsy, hearing and speech impairment. Five people lived in the home at the time of our inspection. Most of the people living in the service were able to express themselves verbally, others used body language.
There was not a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People said they felt safe living in the home and relatives told us that their family members received safe care. Staff understood how to appropriately report and respond to any allegations of abuse.
Safe recruitment procedures ensured that staff were suitable to work with people. Staffing levels were based on people’s needs and promoted their safety and wellbeing.
People had individual risk assessments for all areas of their living activities. These were updated or reviewed when people’s needs changed.
Medicines were stored and administered safely so that people received the medicines they needed. People who wanted to and had been assessed as safe to do so managed parts of their own medicine administration and recording to develop their independence.
People received medical assistance from healthcare professionals including district nurses, opticians, chiropodists and their GP.
Staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to ensure they could meet people’s complex needs. Staff had received the training they needed to enable them to carry out their roles effectively.
We observed that staff sought people’s consent before providing care and support. Staff and management understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Assessments of people’s capacity to make decisions had been carried out in line with the MCA requirements.
Staff were respectful and caring in their approach. People were given the support they needed to ensure they had meaningful occupation and their social needs were met. People’s choices were respected and staff supported people to take part in activities that suited their individuality.
Staff responded to people’s behaviours that challenged with insight, patience and care. People’s communication needs were respected and met to ensure they could express themselves and be understood.
People were supported and encouraged to maintain links with family and friends.
There was a complaints procedure in place. Information about how to complain was displayed in the entrance lobby in pictorial format so that people knew how to make a complaint.
People and their relatives felt the home was well run and were confident they could raise concerns if they had any. There were systems to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the services provided and to recognise when improvements were needed and to act on these.
At our last inspection in May 2013 no concerns were found.
We found that care plans were comprehensive and reflected people's individual needs. The staff delivered the care and treatment that was recommended in the care plans. We saw that Woodcote had arrangements in place, and staff were trained appropriately to deal with foreseeable emergencies.
We saw that the food provided was well balanced, in sufficient quantity and of a high standard. One person told us, "The food is good, I like it, I didn't use to eat much but I am better now. I like baking cakes and we do biscuits too".
We found that Woodcote had a policy to safeguard vulnerable adults and children and were following correct procedures should they have concerns.
We saw that the premises were clean and welcoming. The staff ensured that risks of infection were minimised, they routinely cleaned and disinfected the premises. We saw that scheduled cleaning rotas were being followed. One person who used the service told us, "I change my bed with my keyworker every week and we clean my room together, I like cleaning".
We found that there was a clear recruitment procedure to ensure that staff were skilled and qualified to carry out their roles effectively.
We used this opportunity to talk with the residents who were keen to tell us how they spent their time and what activities they were involved with on a weekly basis. One person told us how she had now been enrolled into college and was starting a course on photography in September. She was very excited about this opportunity and showed us her photograph albums.
The manager confirmed that more staff had been recruited to enable residents more flexibility with activities. One resident said the additional staff now allowed her to go swimming with her boyfriend on a more regular basis. Another resident was able to communicate with us using British Sign Language (BSL) to explain how she was now attending a communications course run by the Deaf Club in Brighton. She also showed us how staff had helped her choose paint for her new bedroom and involved her in the decorating.